Talk:2019–2020 Hong Kong protests: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 147: Line 147:


:::: Well said. And that's precisely also what Matthew hk pointed out above on<em> how</em> to split. (And thank you for bringing this up in the forum.) [[Special:Contributions/124.217.189.132|124.217.189.132]] ([[User talk:124.217.189.132|talk]]) 13:35, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
:::: Well said. And that's precisely also what Matthew hk pointed out above on<em> how</em> to split. (And thank you for bringing this up in the forum.) [[Special:Contributions/124.217.189.132|124.217.189.132]] ([[User talk:124.217.189.132|talk]]) 13:35, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

* Concur with Matthew hk. Thanks for the notice in the private group. [[Special:Contributions/219.76.18.205|219.76.18.205]] ([[User talk:219.76.18.205|talk]]) 10:51, 28 October 2021 (UTC)


== New session about the Criticism of protesters is needed ==
== New session about the Criticism of protesters is needed ==

Revision as of 10:51, 28 October 2021

    Template:Vital article This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 2 September 2020 and 11 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Taylortai0205 (article contribs).

    Article milestones
    DateProcessResult
    April 8, 2020Guild of Copy EditorsCopyedited
    July 26, 2020Peer reviewNot reviewed
    In the newsNews items involving this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on June 11, 2019, June 24, 2019, October 2, 2019, December 3, 2019, and June 5, 2020.

    The protest are still going on.

    The protest are still happening and for the same reasons plus more under CCP China. A correction on the title and some limelight towards their struggle would be nice 2601:100:C100:3540:650A:BC2C:A34E:8CE (talk) 15:38, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Do you have any source? Citobun (talk) 22:31, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I would say 2021 Hong Kong protest or even History of Hong Kong (2020-) may be better article title to cover the post National Security Law Hong Kong. Just one thing i am pretty sure mass scale protest does not exist in Hong Kong now. You want to reflect the real world , create wiki article to cover the mass scale arrest and dissolution of political parties , citing news article should be the real thing to do. Matthew hk (talk) 18:51, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok but do you have a reliable source for this? TypeKnight03 (talk) 04:51, 24 Aug 2021 (UTC)
    @TypeKnight03: Sorry for late reply, but in 2021, some HK people (or most but no action yet) is emigration. https://www.economist.com/britain/2021/09/23/britains-newest-immigrant-group-is-unlike-any-that-came-before
    Or which "you" you want to talk to? Me or Citobun or the ip? Matthew hk (talk) 04:45, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    There are some very small scale ones. Yes they are small scale (in groups as little as four or even two) but that doesn't mean they don't exist. 124.217.189.132 (talk) 13:40, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Article size split

    • Support split - To follow up on a previous discussion, since there is consensus to split, I suggest reducing the "Reactions", "Impact", "Local media coverage", "Police misconduct", "Online confrontations", "Background", "History" as well as the "Clashes between protesters and counter-protesters" sections to ONE paragraph each, and having the rest covered in the sub articles. Obviously, I am open to suggestions. --Jax 0677 (talk) 18:34, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Why are we having this discussion every other month... Reducing the sections to ONE paragraph is an absurd idea. For instance, the article for World War II has way more than just six paragraphs. We probably need a short overview on the changes in Hong Kong one year after the NSL was enacted, but other than, this article is completed and shouldn't be changed significantly. OceanHok (talk) 13:38, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    It is How to split need to be discuss. Or noone bold enough to throw out the details and leave the real essence to actually summarize the protest and the impact. Matthew hk (talk) 18:47, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Strong Support:This article is far too long, and that topic actually needs and deserves an article. You have my full support on this one.! Dunutubble (talk) 22:56, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Dunutubble: we don't need another vote.....the previous discussion has concluded that the article need to be trim . Rather we need discussion on how. Matthew hk (talk) 00:14, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment. Agree with Matthew. It's all about how. I saw his message on an online forum and I agree with his reasoning. 210.6.10.118 (talk) 13:50, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @210.6.10.118: (i know the ping does not work for ip, i just want the layout) Dude...I don't use online forum to discuss en-wikipedia matter (i do use discord and github to discuss POE wiki matter). Or did someone impersonating me? Or did someone just quote me? I am an old guy that CD-rom at LIHKG , as i don't have email to register there. I do have hkgolden.com account Matthew hk (talk) 23:52, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @OceanHok:, And World War 2 is a bad comparison. World War 2, is world war, it involve many battle, many countries. If you want to be more impactful for this 2019–2020 Hong Kong protests, dude........can you even do it like 400 words at least in lead? It is way too long as a summary article that people has lost interest to read it. I do read forum that this is new kind of misinfo war by bumping the article with junk or not so important info and detail so that discourage people to actually read it. This article has way many subarticles to place details. Matthew hk (talk) 01:48, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    And for people in forum . Please create account. DONT use sock. I will submit anyone to WP:SPI. Learn to cite newspaper especially wiki widely acceptable source eg. WSJ, FT, The Economist, NYT. Some western media may be bad, some pro-Beijing newspaper may be bad (e.g. HKEJ), but it is necessary evil to use them. (unless they are discussed in WP:RSN to not use them) Buy book or borrow it from public library and drop down points (or scanner? pirating the whole book is not recommended btw), even they are published by Sino United Publishing, again necessary evil. (Of course on apolitical topic as the company is the mouthpiece of Central Gov) or check the author. I read a book that literally challenged the works by 劉智鵬. You can only add the version that other author rebutting 劉智鵬, or add both versions in articles, as it is harder for wiki editors to act as a professional to judge which version of geo history is right. But some are really common sense that you can easily reject and don't need to mention in wiki article. Also, use talk page more often, please leave discussion of HK topic in WP:WPHK page. Wikipedia is not that accepting the reasoning of we have discussed off-site and don't show the discussion to the public. I.e. Telegram group and discord. You can gossip there but "serious" matter such as which news articles should be used should leave it on wiki article talk page. Matthew hk (talk) 02:00, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    No, I am not comparing the protests to the war itself. What I am trying to say is that I have never seen an article documenting history that has one paragraph per session. This is a stupid and absurd proposal. I agree with further trim (I have been involved with efforts to trim the article last year), but I definitely disagree with trimming the article at such a massive scale. OceanHok (talk) 11:17, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Well said. And that's precisely also what Matthew hk pointed out above on how to split. (And thank you for bringing this up in the forum.) 124.217.189.132 (talk) 13:35, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Concur with Matthew hk. Thanks for the notice in the private group. 219.76.18.205 (talk) 10:51, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    New session about the Criticism of protesters is needed

    The article only mentions police violence, but as far as I know, the protesters also engaged in violent acts such as assaulting police, vandalizing public property, abducting passers-by, and so on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nana byun (talkcontribs) 02:36, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    The information you need is on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactions_to_the_2019%E2%80%932020_Hong_Kong_protests. Dgtdddsx123 (talk) 2:16, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
    I've seen this page before. However, I believe it is preferable to include this column on the page in order to make the content appear balanced on both sides.Nana byun (talk) 02:59, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    We need to fairly represent reliable reference, which seldom means all sides of an argument equally. The Domestic reactions section does not pull any punches. What exactly do you have in mind? Dushan Jugum (talk) 04:04, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    The information is already adequately included in the radical group subsection/domestic response. I don't think any more elaboration is needed. OceanHok (talk) 11:05, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    October 2021: Lead

    The lead was recently changed unilaterally by Dgtdddsx123 as if the article was moved, and as such it no longer conforms to MOS:FIRST. I do not see any real opposition though aside from myself and I am uninterested in a discussion between just me and them. I think the discussion regarding the title of this article should be revived, and my thoughts are as follows:

    • A source using the term "2019–2020 Hong Kong protests" or "2019–2021 Hong Kong protests" is not sufficient justification for its inclusion in the lead. The goal is to avoid redundancy in the lead (i.e. avoid, "The 2019–2021 Hong Kong protests are a series of demonstrations since 15 March 2019 ...")
    • This article is about the Anti-Extradition Law Amendment Bill Movement and the aftermath of its suppression. This article does not cover any protests or demonstrations that occurred in 2021, only the subsequent crackdown. The source provided that uses the term "2019–2021 Hong Kong protests" makes the same mistake.

    All the best, CentreLeftRight 06:42, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    It is to keep pages from contradicting each other. You can also leave comments on the pages that discuss criticism of protesters and about the protests/suppression in 2021 if necessary.
    All the best☺,Dgtdddsx123 (talk) 07:31, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    The title "Anti-Extradition Law Amendment Bill Movement" is kind of a common name in Cantonese, but not really in English. I think we need to accept the fact that there is no more actual act of protest in Hong Kong since July 2020. There is only resentment against the government, but little to no actions to actually defy it in 2021. OceanHok (talk) 07:35, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I doubt hrichina is deemed a reliable source or not. Matthew hk (talk) 17:07, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    List of updated relevant sites. [remark]

    [remark]
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_reactions_to_the_Hong_Kong_national_security_law_(August_2021)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_reactions_to_the_Hong_Kong_national_security_law_(September_2021)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactions_to_the_2019%E2%80%932020_Hong_Kong_protests
    One can leave both negative/positive comments for the protests on the third page.
    This is a flexible page. Dgtdddsx123 (talk) 2:46, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

    This article is way too long. Probably just add a hatnote that ask reader to read another article for post-protest clamp down of Hong Kong freedom and democracy? Feel free to create History of Hong Kong (2019-) or History of Hong Kong (2020-), or just ask reader to read Hong Kong national security law and the effect of literally nuke the pro-democracy political parties into dust? Matthew hk (talk) 09:26, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    no offense... (no canvassing please.., Matthew.) Dgtdddsx123 (talk) 4:19, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

    Well, now play a game that accuse me canvassing? Matthew hk (talk) 04:31, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]